Thursday, December 17, 2009
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Ronald Reagan - 1980 RNC Convention
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmmgVFByeaI
Please notice the differences between Reagan's speeches and Obama's speeches. This is but a very minor example but poignant nonetheless. Reagan always eludes to America's spirit, its character, its freedoms and what makes it great. Obama eludes to the 'status quo', the poor, our mistakes and that unless we combine ourselves with the world that we will no longer be great. This is a long video but if you for some God forsaken reason are moved and wooed by Obama's apologetic and self righteous speeches, take a minute to listen to a great leader of past America and his words. We could use this man now who doesn't apologize for what makes us great but says its what makes us great that will persevere.
Obama's speeches will be placed on the ash heap of history since he continues to go out of his way to tell us all what he thinks is wrong with us and that if we don't follow what his ideals are for what he thinks will make us great, well then, we are just going to remain mediocre. It's in his words if you listen carefully. Open your ears America...our doom lay just ahead if we continue to be led to the precipice by Obama and his left wing cronies hell bent on America's destruction from within.
Please notice the differences between Reagan's speeches and Obama's speeches. This is but a very minor example but poignant nonetheless. Reagan always eludes to America's spirit, its character, its freedoms and what makes it great. Obama eludes to the 'status quo', the poor, our mistakes and that unless we combine ourselves with the world that we will no longer be great. This is a long video but if you for some God forsaken reason are moved and wooed by Obama's apologetic and self righteous speeches, take a minute to listen to a great leader of past America and his words. We could use this man now who doesn't apologize for what makes us great but says its what makes us great that will persevere.
Obama's speeches will be placed on the ash heap of history since he continues to go out of his way to tell us all what he thinks is wrong with us and that if we don't follow what his ideals are for what he thinks will make us great, well then, we are just going to remain mediocre. It's in his words if you listen carefully. Open your ears America...our doom lay just ahead if we continue to be led to the precipice by Obama and his left wing cronies hell bent on America's destruction from within.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Climatologists challenge the UN to present data!
Things are really HEATING up (pun completely intentional) on the man-made global warming hoax. Follow the money...just like with American Stimulus II, follow the money and you will see what the truth is.
Real climatologists challenging the UN to present the data they use to try and force a socio-economic and geo-political change for the entire world. Hey Al Gore, you have been asking someone to tell you who these 'scientists who don't believe in global warming are because they don't exist.' Here you go Mr. Gore. Challenge them and take some real questions to test your knowledge of the earth's atmosphere and heating/cooling that has existed throughout the earth's existence...yes Al, even prior to man you empty suit.
http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org/
Real climatologists challenging the UN to present the data they use to try and force a socio-economic and geo-political change for the entire world. Hey Al Gore, you have been asking someone to tell you who these 'scientists who don't believe in global warming are because they don't exist.' Here you go Mr. Gore. Challenge them and take some real questions to test your knowledge of the earth's atmosphere and heating/cooling that has existed throughout the earth's existence...yes Al, even prior to man you empty suit.
http://www.copenhagenclimatechallenge.org/
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Copenhagen - the fluff you need to know! Hypocrisy?
http://www.isthereglobalcooling.com/
Copenhagen climate summit: 1,200 limos, 140 private planes and caviar wedges
The article below was published in the UK Telegraph.By Andrew Gilligan
Published: 10:55PM GMT 05 Dec 2009
On a normal day, Majken Friss Jorgensen, managing director of Copenhagen's biggest limousine company, says her firm has twelve vehicles on the road. During the "summit to save the world", which opens here tomorrow, she will have 200.
"We thought they were not going to have many cars, due to it being a climate convention," she says. "But it seems that somebody last week looked at the weather report."
Ms Jorgensen reckons that between her and her rivals the total number of limos in Copenhagen next week has already broken the 1,200 barrier. The French alone rang up on Thursday and ordered another 42. "We haven't got enough limos in the country to fulfil the demand," she says. "We're having to drive them in hundreds of miles from Germany and Sweden."
And the total number of electric cars or hybrids among that number? "Five," says Ms Jorgensen. "The government has some alternative fuel cars but the rest will be petrol or diesel. We don't have any hybrids in Denmark, unfortunately, due to the extreme taxes on those cars. It makes no sense at all, but it's very Danish."
The airport says it is expecting up to 140 extra private jets during the peak period alone, so far over its capacity that the planes will have to fly off to regional airports – or to Sweden – to park, returning to Copenhagen to pick up their VIP passengers.
As well 15,000 delegates and officials, 5,000 journalists and 98 world leaders, the Danish capital will be blessed by the presence of Leonardo DiCaprio, Daryl Hannah, Helena Christensen, Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Prince Charles. A Republican US senator, Jim Inhofe, is jetting in at the head of an anti-climate-change "Truth Squad." The top hotels – all fully booked at £650 a night – are readying their Climate Convention menus of (no doubt sustainable) scallops, foie gras and sculpted caviar wedges.
At the takeaway pizza end of the spectrum, Copenhagen's clean pavements are starting to fill with slightly less well-scrubbed protesters from all over Europe. In the city's famous anarchist commune of Christiania this morning, among the hash dealers and heavily-graffitied walls, they started their two-week "Climate Bottom Meeting," complete with a "storytelling yurt" and a "funeral of the day" for various corrupt, "heatist" concepts such as "economic growth".
The Danish government is cunningly spending a million kroner (£120,000) to give the protesters KlimaForum, a "parallel conference" in the magnificent DGI-byen sports centre. The hope, officials admit, is that they will work off their youthful energies on the climbing wall, state-of-the-art swimming pools and bowling alley, Just in case, however, Denmark has taken delivery of its first-ever water-cannon – one of the newspapers is running a competition to suggest names for it – plus sweeping new police powers. The authorities have been proudly showing us their new temporary prison, 360 cages in a disused brewery, housing 4,000 detainees.
And this being Scandinavia, even the prostitutes are doing their bit for the planet. Outraged by a council postcard urging delegates to "be sustainable, don't buy sex," the local sex workers' union – they have unions here – has announced that all its 1,400 members will give free intercourse to anyone with a climate conference delegate's pass. The term "carbon dating" just took on an entirely new meaning.
At least the sex will be C02-neutral. According to the organisers, the eleven-day conference, including the participants' travel, will create a total of 41,000 tonnes of "carbon dioxide equivalent", equal to the amount produced over the same period by a city the size of Middlesbrough.
The temptation, then, is to dismiss the whole thing as a ridiculous circus. Many of the participants do not really need to be here. And far from "saving the world," the world's leaders have already agreed that this conference will not produce any kind of binding deal, merely an interim statement of intent.
Instead of swift and modest reductions in carbon – say, two per cent a year, starting next year – for which they could possibly be held accountable, the politicians will bandy around grandiose targets of 80-per-cent-plus by 2050, by which time few of the leaders at Copenhagen will even be alive, let alone still in office.
Even if they had agreed anything binding, past experience suggests that the participants would not, in fact, feel bound by it. Most countries – Britain excepted – are on course to break the modest pledges they made at the last major climate summit, in Kyoto.
And as the delegates meet, they do so under a shadow. For the first time, not just the methods but the entire purpose of the climate change agenda is being questioned. Leaked emails showing key scientists conspiring to fix data that undermined their case have boosted the sceptic lobby. Australia has voted down climate change laws. Last week's unusually strident attack by the Energy Secretary, Ed Miliband, on climate change "saboteurs" reflected real fear in government that momentum is slipping away from the cause.
In Copenhagen there was a humbler note among some delegates. "If we fail, one reason could be our overconfidence," said Simron Jit Singh, of the Institute of Social Ecology. "Because we are here, talking in a group of people who probably agree with each other, we can be blinded to the challenges of the other side. We feel that we are the good guys, the selfless saviours, and they are the bad guys."
As Mr Singh suggests, the interesting question is perhaps not whether the climate changers have got the science right – they probably have – but whether they have got the pitch right. Some campaigners' apocalyptic predictions and religious righteousness – funeral ceremonies for economic growth and the like – can be alienating, and may help explain why the wider public does not seem to share the urgency felt by those in Copenhagen this week.
In a rather perceptive recent comment, Mr Miliband said it was vital to give people a positive vision of a low-carbon future. "If Martin Luther King had come along and said 'I have a nightmare,' people would not have followed him," he said.
Over the next two weeks, that positive vision may come not from the overheated rhetoric in the conference centre, but from Copenhagen itself. Limos apart, it is a city filled entirely with bicycles, stuffed with retrofitted, energy-efficient old buildings, and seems to embody the civilised pleasures of low-carbon living without any of the puritanism so beloved of British greens.
And inside the hall, not everything is looking bad. Even the sudden rush for limos may be a good sign. It means that more top people are coming, which means they scent something could be going right here.
The US, which rejected Kyoto, is on board now, albeit too tentatively for most delegates. President Obama's decision to stay later in Copenhagen may signal some sort of agreement between America and China: a necessity for any real global action, and something that could be presented as a "victory" for the talks.
The hot air this week will be massive, the whole proceedings eminently mockable, but it would be far too early to write off this conference as a failure.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
Your Fair Share is not in MY WALLET!
Since when, in our society did it become the providers responsibility to deliver the needs of the recipient? Put another way, when did the needs of the recipient trump the rights of the provider?
What we have going on in our country now, and it started under Bush (most recently but really began as far back as the 1930's), is that when you are too lazy to work, don't worry, the government will give you money. When you are hungry, don't worry, the government will give you bread. We are on a path where if I own land and build an artisian well to bring water from under the soil of my property up (and please don't legalize this hypothetical with mineral rights issues, etc) for my family to drink, the government will soon tell me that I must provide for the needy neighbor who has no water. But why should I? I am the one who put in all the hard work and my family should prosper from our hard work. I am not taking from someone else and I am not on anothers land taking their water. So why is it my responsibility to provide for my needy neighbor?
It's not my responsibility. If he is too lazy to build his own well, then I am sorry, but he should suffer the consequences of his inaction. However, the government now believes that the rights of the provider no longer outweigh the needs of the recipient. What this will soon do, and we are on a crash course to learn sooner rather than later, is that when the provider has to do 2x the work to see half the benefit (since the recipient isn't providing anything but realizes the other half of the providers benefit) then the provider will either produce less or stop producing. Why? Because it is economically not in his best interest to provide it if the costs outweigh the benefit. And guess who steps in and picks up the pieces....you guessed it, the US Federal Government. This, in turn, makes you more dependent on them to solve your problems. When this happens then the government creates 3 classes of society, 2 of which don't favor the working class. These classes are broken down in a 1) provider class (the employer), 2) the recipient (the worker) and 3) the access class (the wealthy, aka employer, celebrity). Put a simpler way as it relates to health care...what wealthy group is out there touting the most that we need government run health care? Hollywood! And their cadillac plans will leave them with the best quality health care. I mean, do you really think that Ashton Kutcher or Ben Afleck is going to stand in line next to you while trying to see a doctor? Not on your life. Is your elected politician going to hang out in the waiting room to live with the same level of health care service they voted to have you live with? Yeah, that's about as likely as Obama turning fiscally conservative. So what does that do? It places an even wider barrier between the working class and the class who provides the work. Get used to it. It's the 'change' and 'hope' you voted for. You asked for the mandate, its just too damn bad you have to live with that mandate. Like I now say, just because I empowered you doesn't mean you are empowered. Think about that for a second. Just because I voted for someone doesn't mean that that person does not now have to answer to me. But your liberal democrat friends say, 'we were voted in on a mandate.' No you weren't. If you were then you would have already passed health care, passed cap N trade, probably would have already rammed through another stimulus bill and would have gone ahead and bailed out another failed industry. Mandates are governed unfortunately by economics in a capitalist society. Of course, with the current administration it's just a matter of time before the laws of economics in a free market society ceases to exist.
If you want to understand a great example of economics 101, please click on the link below. This very short book, easily readable in about 20 minutes online, is an elementary guide to understanding the laws of economics and how it effects us every day. It's called, Economics in one lesson. It quite simply is the best, shortest and most to the point economics lesson one can learn. This teaches you for free what an economics major will teach you for about $100,000.
http://jim.com/econ/
What we have going on in our country now, and it started under Bush (most recently but really began as far back as the 1930's), is that when you are too lazy to work, don't worry, the government will give you money. When you are hungry, don't worry, the government will give you bread. We are on a path where if I own land and build an artisian well to bring water from under the soil of my property up (and please don't legalize this hypothetical with mineral rights issues, etc) for my family to drink, the government will soon tell me that I must provide for the needy neighbor who has no water. But why should I? I am the one who put in all the hard work and my family should prosper from our hard work. I am not taking from someone else and I am not on anothers land taking their water. So why is it my responsibility to provide for my needy neighbor?
It's not my responsibility. If he is too lazy to build his own well, then I am sorry, but he should suffer the consequences of his inaction. However, the government now believes that the rights of the provider no longer outweigh the needs of the recipient. What this will soon do, and we are on a crash course to learn sooner rather than later, is that when the provider has to do 2x the work to see half the benefit (since the recipient isn't providing anything but realizes the other half of the providers benefit) then the provider will either produce less or stop producing. Why? Because it is economically not in his best interest to provide it if the costs outweigh the benefit. And guess who steps in and picks up the pieces....you guessed it, the US Federal Government. This, in turn, makes you more dependent on them to solve your problems. When this happens then the government creates 3 classes of society, 2 of which don't favor the working class. These classes are broken down in a 1) provider class (the employer), 2) the recipient (the worker) and 3) the access class (the wealthy, aka employer, celebrity). Put a simpler way as it relates to health care...what wealthy group is out there touting the most that we need government run health care? Hollywood! And their cadillac plans will leave them with the best quality health care. I mean, do you really think that Ashton Kutcher or Ben Afleck is going to stand in line next to you while trying to see a doctor? Not on your life. Is your elected politician going to hang out in the waiting room to live with the same level of health care service they voted to have you live with? Yeah, that's about as likely as Obama turning fiscally conservative. So what does that do? It places an even wider barrier between the working class and the class who provides the work. Get used to it. It's the 'change' and 'hope' you voted for. You asked for the mandate, its just too damn bad you have to live with that mandate. Like I now say, just because I empowered you doesn't mean you are empowered. Think about that for a second. Just because I voted for someone doesn't mean that that person does not now have to answer to me. But your liberal democrat friends say, 'we were voted in on a mandate.' No you weren't. If you were then you would have already passed health care, passed cap N trade, probably would have already rammed through another stimulus bill and would have gone ahead and bailed out another failed industry. Mandates are governed unfortunately by economics in a capitalist society. Of course, with the current administration it's just a matter of time before the laws of economics in a free market society ceases to exist.
If you want to understand a great example of economics 101, please click on the link below. This very short book, easily readable in about 20 minutes online, is an elementary guide to understanding the laws of economics and how it effects us every day. It's called, Economics in one lesson. It quite simply is the best, shortest and most to the point economics lesson one can learn. This teaches you for free what an economics major will teach you for about $100,000.
http://jim.com/econ/
Saturday, October 17, 2009
Democrats, Racism & Slavery!
When the left in this country demonizes conservatives as racists, it and the media then push the claim with headlines and lead stories on the 24/7 news cycle with the likes of Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton headlining and supporting the claims. What these people unbelievably FAIL to tell you is that history and RECENT history doesn't support the claim that the republican party is the racist party. Sure, are there conservatives that are racist? Of course. Just like there are equally as many liberals that are racist. These racists can be found all over the country but in extremely small numbers. The south garners the most 'racist' attention because of the Civil War and events leading up to the civil rights movement in the 1960's. Which then begs another question. What party was in control of the southern states during the mid to late 1800's who believed it was their right to keep and harbor slaves as property? And, who was the party who first championed civil rights for blacks?
So let's look at the history of race in the U.S. and how democrats have effected the evolutionary rise of the black American. Also, if you so choose the National Black Republicans go into great detail of the democratic parties racist views and positions dating back over 150 years (http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-OBAMA-CanYouSpareAPROCLAMATION).
1. Who was president and decided to fight the Civil War to end slavery of black Americans?
2. Who signed the Emancipation Proclamation?
3. What Party passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution granting blacks freedom, citizenship, and the right to vote?
4. What political party filibustered in 1964 prior to voting on the Civil Rights Act?
5. Who was the president who invited the first black American (Booker T. Washington) to the White House and what political party was he from?
6. What party was the first black VP candidate (Frederick Douglas) on the ticket for?
7. Who was the party who refused to seat black delegates until 1933?
8. What political party during the reconstruction era, had as their slogan, "It's a white man's party, let the white man rule." And in 1948 campaign, what political party's slogan was "Segregation Forever!"?
9. What party was started in 1854 as the anti-slavery party, fought to free blacks from slavery and championed civil rights for blacks?
10. What Party fought to keep blacks in slavery and was the Party of the Ku Klux Klan?
11. What was the Party of the founding fathers of the NAACP who were themselves white?
12. What is the Party of current Senator Robert Byrd who was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, Senator Fritz Hollings who hoisted the Confederate flag over the state capitol in South Carolina when he was the governor, and Senator Ted Kennedy who recently insulted black judicial nominees by calling them “Neanderthals” while blocking their appointments?
13. What was the Party of President John F. Kennedy who voted against the 1957 Civil Rights law as a Senator, then opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. after his becoming president, and who later had the FBI (supervised by his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy) investigate Dr. King on suspicion of being a communist?
14. What was the Party of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Harry Truman who rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission?
15. What was the Party of President Dwight Eisenhower who sent U.S. troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation?
16. What political party currently has a black man as their chairman?
People in this country are, for the most part, afraid to discuss race. One of my best friends, a very successful black man, and I have had several discussions about race. Of course, I can never relate to his situation, just like I cannot relate to the life experiences of my Korean best friend, my Indian best friend, or my Jewish best friend. However, we can have an open discussion about it which I wish every American could do with all races in this country, not just black and white. It will be educational to each race to understand the others viewpoints, outlook and historical context by which we arrived here today and how to progress forward. Constructive discussion would go a long way to removing 'racist' labels from being placed on someone for simply saying, "You lie". But, no matter how constructive those discussions are, it of course will never put to rest the fact that some very ignorant people will always judge a person based upon the color of skin and not the content of their character.
The point of this blog entry was not to show that republicans/conservatives don't have, included in its party, racist voters. Nor was it a 'ha, ha, ha, gotcha'. Any person who believes that the republican party, especially after labeling Joe Wilson AND all tea partier's "Racist", must ask themselves...what political party, historically, has done more for helping to push black America's progress? Study history and the truth may very well surprise you. Also, since your federal government took over education how much better have blacks done, and even whites, in their graduation rates? You might want to research that for yourself. For all that democrats claim to do to help the black American, the evidence points to far different facts.
Thomas Sowell (links below) speaks from experience and I wish I could hear someone with facts that clearly demonstrates that welfare's expanse has helped increase jobs, lower abortion rates, lower children being born out of wedlock, increase wages, increase education and graduation rates, etc. It's unfortunate that the rod and staff that so many like to hit with is also the crutch that so many use. Ironic? And a great article was just written about minimum wage and what the detriment to the black community minimum wage has done to their job skill acceleration and employment. Democrats continue to push minimum wage hikes claiming it 'helps blacks and minorities', yet the exact opposite holds true. So, if democrats are so for blacks succeeding then why are literally all their policies flawed to the point that it actually holds back blacks and minorities?
But like liberal democrat socialists like to say, if you are against continued dependence upon welfare and minimum wage then you are a racist since these programs helps poverty stricken minorities. When will minorities have the freedom of thought to wake up and ask themselves, "Demonstrated by my constant support of the democratic party agenda, how much better is my life today?"
http://www.youtube.com/user/FightTheGoodFightUSA#p/a/f/1/2GklCBvS-eI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyG1zmdh1pA&feature=PlayList&p=BE7B862704D31B44&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=1
So let's look at the history of race in the U.S. and how democrats have effected the evolutionary rise of the black American. Also, if you so choose the National Black Republicans go into great detail of the democratic parties racist views and positions dating back over 150 years (http://www.nationalblackrepublicans.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=pages.DYK-OBAMA-CanYouSpareAPROCLAMATION).
1. Who was president and decided to fight the Civil War to end slavery of black Americans?
2. Who signed the Emancipation Proclamation?
3. What Party passed the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments to the U. S. Constitution granting blacks freedom, citizenship, and the right to vote?
4. What political party filibustered in 1964 prior to voting on the Civil Rights Act?
5. Who was the president who invited the first black American (Booker T. Washington) to the White House and what political party was he from?
6. What party was the first black VP candidate (Frederick Douglas) on the ticket for?
7. Who was the party who refused to seat black delegates until 1933?
8. What political party during the reconstruction era, had as their slogan, "It's a white man's party, let the white man rule." And in 1948 campaign, what political party's slogan was "Segregation Forever!"?
9. What party was started in 1854 as the anti-slavery party, fought to free blacks from slavery and championed civil rights for blacks?
10. What Party fought to keep blacks in slavery and was the Party of the Ku Klux Klan?
11. What was the Party of the founding fathers of the NAACP who were themselves white?
12. What is the Party of current Senator Robert Byrd who was a member of the Ku Klux Klan, Senator Fritz Hollings who hoisted the Confederate flag over the state capitol in South Carolina when he was the governor, and Senator Ted Kennedy who recently insulted black judicial nominees by calling them “Neanderthals” while blocking their appointments?
13. What was the Party of President John F. Kennedy who voted against the 1957 Civil Rights law as a Senator, then opposed the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. after his becoming president, and who later had the FBI (supervised by his brother, Attorney General Robert Kennedy) investigate Dr. King on suspicion of being a communist?
14. What was the Party of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and President Harry Truman who rejected anti-lynching laws and efforts to establish a permanent Civil Rights Commission?
15. What was the Party of President Dwight Eisenhower who sent U.S. troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools, established the Civil Rights Commission in 1958, and appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation?
16. What political party currently has a black man as their chairman?
People in this country are, for the most part, afraid to discuss race. One of my best friends, a very successful black man, and I have had several discussions about race. Of course, I can never relate to his situation, just like I cannot relate to the life experiences of my Korean best friend, my Indian best friend, or my Jewish best friend. However, we can have an open discussion about it which I wish every American could do with all races in this country, not just black and white. It will be educational to each race to understand the others viewpoints, outlook and historical context by which we arrived here today and how to progress forward. Constructive discussion would go a long way to removing 'racist' labels from being placed on someone for simply saying, "You lie". But, no matter how constructive those discussions are, it of course will never put to rest the fact that some very ignorant people will always judge a person based upon the color of skin and not the content of their character.
The point of this blog entry was not to show that republicans/conservatives don't have, included in its party, racist voters. Nor was it a 'ha, ha, ha, gotcha'. Any person who believes that the republican party, especially after labeling Joe Wilson AND all tea partier's "Racist", must ask themselves...what political party, historically, has done more for helping to push black America's progress? Study history and the truth may very well surprise you. Also, since your federal government took over education how much better have blacks done, and even whites, in their graduation rates? You might want to research that for yourself. For all that democrats claim to do to help the black American, the evidence points to far different facts.
Thomas Sowell (links below) speaks from experience and I wish I could hear someone with facts that clearly demonstrates that welfare's expanse has helped increase jobs, lower abortion rates, lower children being born out of wedlock, increase wages, increase education and graduation rates, etc. It's unfortunate that the rod and staff that so many like to hit with is also the crutch that so many use. Ironic? And a great article was just written about minimum wage and what the detriment to the black community minimum wage has done to their job skill acceleration and employment. Democrats continue to push minimum wage hikes claiming it 'helps blacks and minorities', yet the exact opposite holds true. So, if democrats are so for blacks succeeding then why are literally all their policies flawed to the point that it actually holds back blacks and minorities?
But like liberal democrat socialists like to say, if you are against continued dependence upon welfare and minimum wage then you are a racist since these programs helps poverty stricken minorities. When will minorities have the freedom of thought to wake up and ask themselves, "Demonstrated by my constant support of the democratic party agenda, how much better is my life today?"
http://www.youtube.com/user/FightTheGoodFightUSA#p/a/f/1/2GklCBvS-eI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyG1zmdh1pA&feature=PlayList&p=BE7B862704D31B44&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=1
Friday, October 16, 2009
10 Conditions for transition to Communism
I have provided a link from another blogger who eloquently points out the road we are headed down if we don't wake up quickly as a nation. Please read the 10 points memo and ask yourself, "Is he a crazy right wing nut or does he make legitimate points that I need to be more concerned about?" If you do feel that he is speaking on things that you feel directly are effecting you and what you see then follow his support of "TakeAmericaBack2010" (www.takeamericaback2010.com). You can follow his blog to...and no, I do not know this gentleman other than to say that I agree with much he has to say.
http://myspiritof76.blogspot.com/2009/09/calling-spade-spade-or-in-this-case.html
Good luck and lets hope that saying of "God bless America" will continue well into our future generations. It's up to you to help make that happen!
http://myspiritof76.blogspot.com/2009/09/calling-spade-spade-or-in-this-case.html
Good luck and lets hope that saying of "God bless America" will continue well into our future generations. It's up to you to help make that happen!
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Obama, the Olympics and failure!
As Barack took off on Air Force One there were many, including myself, that thought 'he wouldn't go there unless he knew, with underhand dealings, promises of future endeavors and untoward dealings that Chicago was a sure bet to win the 2016 Games. Many here in America lauded the presidents effort and said that well 'with health care seeming to now be on firm footing showing signs of promise' then the 'be all' president had time to be all to Denmark. In the middle of a huge health care debacle, with the cap and trade travesty looming at our front door, and with the economic numbers indicating strongly that the stimulus isn't working, the international president has the time to travel on AF One for 8 hours and pitch why Chicago should be the IOC choice to host the Olympic games.
Forgetting for a second that we have two wars going on in far away lands, one in which the president said we 'took our eye off the ball' in the war that 'really matters in Afghanistan,' Obama also convened for the first time under any US President, the role of the head of the UN Security Council. So now the man who takes over companies, fires GM's, sets executive level pay, won't meddle in Iran elections but cuts off ties to Honduras who constitutionally had the right to remove their expectant tyrant by law, the man who can't go on TV enough to push his far left health care reform bill, who touts the success of his Stimulus Bill as having saved the US economy from the brink of collapse, who gets involved in the arrest of a black professor by a white cop, and who is so childish as to not grant Chris Wallace a Sunday morning round of interviews while he did 6 others, but now this man has time with all this on his plate to go pitch the 2016 Summer Games in Chicago aside from his trying to be the savior to so many? I mean who could possibly have the time? He wants credit for everything but takes blame for nothing. In fact, he delegated the writing of all his major policy initiatives to Congress and Senate democratic leaders so that his 'hands' aren't on the bills.
You see, by having Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman and Harry Reid write most of the legislation for Stimulus, Omnibus, Cap and Trade, Health Care and other major economic policy, Obama can say, "hey, they wrote it and when it came to my desk I signed it because so much had gone into the crafting and political capital had been spent by so few to give health care to so many." But if the bill fails then Obama can say that his fingers weren't on it. "It was up to the house and senate to deliver me a bill" he would say. This way only that which he personally touches would turn to gold!
Except for the Chicago Olympic games bid. The man who supposedly the international community reveres and loves just got a right-cross to the left chin in the 1st round of a major heavyweight fight. The liberal pundits out there now say, 'this is not a story. It's no big deal.' However, had the tide been different and Chicago had won, do you honestly believe for one second that these same pundits and Obama himself would not have been taking credit for this? Hell, Michele and Barack in their two separate speeches referred to themselves in the "I" or "Me" context exactly 26 times each in telling their story. Then both of them at the end of their respective speeches said that Chicago winning the Olympic games is not about 'them' its about Chicago. Really? After spending your 5 minutes cramming in reference after reference of yourself in the first or third person you are able to actually hope that the reader believes that your touching speech is about something greater than yourself and is actually about others?
The sad fact of the matter is that the US could have used the 'spirit' of the games to pick itself up off the mat, much like LA did in 1984 and possibly help rejuvenate American society into believing again. But, I suspect, that had we won the bid for the Olympic games, not only would Chicagoans and Illinois have been broke, the taxpayers of the US would have had to pick up a large piece of the pie and the only ones who would have gotten rich and had their pockets lined were the one's using our taxpayer dollars to fly to the country whose citizens wear wooden clog...Valerie Jarrett, Michele Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Mayor Daley and David Axelrod.
Hell, it would have been 2016 and what else are you supposed to do after you have quite possibly ruined the greatest superpower the world has ever seen? You light a torch to go out down in flames. Sleep well Obama's and cronies, so far the international stage is pitching shut out against you and we are fairly deep into the ballgame. Who's your ace in the bullpen and who is the DH who can swing for the fences?
Forgetting for a second that we have two wars going on in far away lands, one in which the president said we 'took our eye off the ball' in the war that 'really matters in Afghanistan,' Obama also convened for the first time under any US President, the role of the head of the UN Security Council. So now the man who takes over companies, fires GM's, sets executive level pay, won't meddle in Iran elections but cuts off ties to Honduras who constitutionally had the right to remove their expectant tyrant by law, the man who can't go on TV enough to push his far left health care reform bill, who touts the success of his Stimulus Bill as having saved the US economy from the brink of collapse, who gets involved in the arrest of a black professor by a white cop, and who is so childish as to not grant Chris Wallace a Sunday morning round of interviews while he did 6 others, but now this man has time with all this on his plate to go pitch the 2016 Summer Games in Chicago aside from his trying to be the savior to so many? I mean who could possibly have the time? He wants credit for everything but takes blame for nothing. In fact, he delegated the writing of all his major policy initiatives to Congress and Senate democratic leaders so that his 'hands' aren't on the bills.
You see, by having Nancy Pelosi, Henry Waxman and Harry Reid write most of the legislation for Stimulus, Omnibus, Cap and Trade, Health Care and other major economic policy, Obama can say, "hey, they wrote it and when it came to my desk I signed it because so much had gone into the crafting and political capital had been spent by so few to give health care to so many." But if the bill fails then Obama can say that his fingers weren't on it. "It was up to the house and senate to deliver me a bill" he would say. This way only that which he personally touches would turn to gold!
Except for the Chicago Olympic games bid. The man who supposedly the international community reveres and loves just got a right-cross to the left chin in the 1st round of a major heavyweight fight. The liberal pundits out there now say, 'this is not a story. It's no big deal.' However, had the tide been different and Chicago had won, do you honestly believe for one second that these same pundits and Obama himself would not have been taking credit for this? Hell, Michele and Barack in their two separate speeches referred to themselves in the "I" or "Me" context exactly 26 times each in telling their story. Then both of them at the end of their respective speeches said that Chicago winning the Olympic games is not about 'them' its about Chicago. Really? After spending your 5 minutes cramming in reference after reference of yourself in the first or third person you are able to actually hope that the reader believes that your touching speech is about something greater than yourself and is actually about others?
The sad fact of the matter is that the US could have used the 'spirit' of the games to pick itself up off the mat, much like LA did in 1984 and possibly help rejuvenate American society into believing again. But, I suspect, that had we won the bid for the Olympic games, not only would Chicagoans and Illinois have been broke, the taxpayers of the US would have had to pick up a large piece of the pie and the only ones who would have gotten rich and had their pockets lined were the one's using our taxpayer dollars to fly to the country whose citizens wear wooden clog...Valerie Jarrett, Michele Obama, Barack Hussein Obama, Mayor Daley and David Axelrod.
Hell, it would have been 2016 and what else are you supposed to do after you have quite possibly ruined the greatest superpower the world has ever seen? You light a torch to go out down in flames. Sleep well Obama's and cronies, so far the international stage is pitching shut out against you and we are fairly deep into the ballgame. Who's your ace in the bullpen and who is the DH who can swing for the fences?
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Senate panel blocks GOP's abortion, illegals measures - Washington Times
Liberal democrats block GOP explicit request to block federal funding for ABORTIONS AND ILLEGAL ALIENS! Who's looking out for you? Be honest with yourself, ask yourself the tough questions and demand answers from your politicians.
Senate panel blocks GOP's abortion, illegals measures - Washington Times
Shared via AddThis
Senate panel blocks GOP's abortion, illegals measures - Washington Times
Shared via AddThis
Monday, September 28, 2009
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/28/at-the-presidents-pleasure/?source=newsletter_opinion_headlines
'Safe school Czar' promoted homosexual sex and statutory rape! Obama's czars are VERY RADICAL to the ideals of America's majority.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/28/at-the-presidents-pleasure/?source=newsletter_opinion_headlines
Shared via AddThis
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/sep/28/at-the-presidents-pleasure/?source=newsletter_opinion_headlines
Shared via AddThis
Sunday, September 27, 2009
End of America's moment - Washington Times
Is Obama ending America's reign as the last remaining superpower for Liberal Utopianism? You be the judge.
End of America's moment - Washington Times
Shared via AddThis
End of America's moment - Washington Times
Shared via AddThis
Monday, August 31, 2009
Remembering Mary Jo Kopechne!
http://www.theweek.com/article/index/99960/Remembering_Mary_Jo_Kopechne
For all the glorious hoopla that democrats and the Kennedy family are seeking to shine on Ol' Ted and his championing of 'affordable health care for all Americans,' let's not forget that this is also a man with a very dark past. His death calls for remembering a person who today may have been one of the biggest supporters of Obama/Kennedy care had she not been left to die in a drowning car driven by Ted Kennedy. Way to go Ted...fight for your own life but disregard that of an innocent woman catching a ride with you in order to hopefully make her ferry home. And just when you think the Kennedy Camelot clan couldn't sink any lower they usher the Kennedy kids up to speak about their 'uncle's' wish for all Americans to one day have affordable health care. Sadly, the family didn't even try to pretend that the statement was written by a 12 year old. It sounds like it was written by a Kennedy speech writer. And this is Camelot?
So, as you can see, even in death the liberal left pundits and editorials still put this man above his fellow man and shower him with praise. These are the same liberal bloggers and media outlets who said of Ronald Reagan at the time of his death that he 'caused Aids and millions of deaths worldwide.' Liberals, when faced with the facts that Kennedy killed an innocent woman choose to only focus on his policy issues while with no shred of evidence, only pure lunacy, they attack a president who happened to simply be the leader of the free world at the time that AIDS was identified and during its initial spread around the globe. Personal responsibility never factor into their logic. At the time, it was unfortunately believed that AIDS was spread through drug use and homosexual intercourse. If you continued to participate in either these actions then its your fault, not President Reagan's. However, staying on the basis of personal responsibility, it appeared that Kennedy had little of it, at least at the time of Kopechne's death. And if one does recall, it was the Reagan's who pioneered the "Just say No" campaign to at least try and curtail drug usage...however, it's up to the individual to adhere to the moral choices that lie in front of them.
Mary Jo Kopechne, let it be known that on the day of Ted Kennedy's death and memorial there were hundreds of thousands of mourners for his life, but there are still hundreds of thousands of people who also remembered that it was at this man's hands that your life was snuffed out at an early age. Regardless of your political affiliation and whatever radicalism may or may not have come from you if you had survived that fateful day, a human life is God's gift and should be valued as such. It appears that Ted Kennedy valued his life over yours, much like he continued to value his life over the rest of ours until his dying day. For it's Kennedy's belief that we should have health care afforded to us by us, but it's not the health care that he, Ted Kennedy, would himself sign up for. People should remember that as they wait and see if their politician will sign them up for something that is not good enough for the politician. Mary Jo may you rest in peace and I can only hope that Ted is now there with you trying like hell to make his peace with you. It's your call if you choose to forgive him and you have my support either way. However, its ultimately up to God and that is where, I believe, Ted is trembling in his boots.
For all the glorious hoopla that democrats and the Kennedy family are seeking to shine on Ol' Ted and his championing of 'affordable health care for all Americans,' let's not forget that this is also a man with a very dark past. His death calls for remembering a person who today may have been one of the biggest supporters of Obama/Kennedy care had she not been left to die in a drowning car driven by Ted Kennedy. Way to go Ted...fight for your own life but disregard that of an innocent woman catching a ride with you in order to hopefully make her ferry home. And just when you think the Kennedy Camelot clan couldn't sink any lower they usher the Kennedy kids up to speak about their 'uncle's' wish for all Americans to one day have affordable health care. Sadly, the family didn't even try to pretend that the statement was written by a 12 year old. It sounds like it was written by a Kennedy speech writer. And this is Camelot?
Ted Kennedy has passed away, so how about a solemn tribute for the dead, said Henry Rollins in Vanity Fair. Not Kennedy—that's covered—but what about Mary Jo Kopechne? As people mourn Kennedy, it would be "negligent" to forget the young political activist who, at age 28, died trapped in Kennedy's car when he drove it off a Chappaquiddick bridge in 1969.
Fine, said Melissa Lafsky in The Huffington Post, but remember that Mary Jo Kopechne, a former Robert F. Kennedy campaign worker, "wasn't a right-wing talking point"—she was a dedicated civil rights activist who believed in the things Ted Kennedy spent his life fighting for. Nobody can say what she would have thought "about arguably being a catalyst for the most successful Senate career in history"—she might even have thought it was "worth it."
That may be the "most amazingly shallow, myopic, and ultimately self centered sentence ever written," said Rick Moran in American Thinker. Mary Jo Kopechne, no matter what her political beliefs, would have preferred to live a "full life" with family, career, and kids, over being "a catalyst" whose death pushed Kennedy to give up his presidential ambitions and serve in the Senate. "What a despicable thing to write."
No, what's despicable, said Zennie Abraham in the San Francisco Chronicle, is demonizing a man who dedicated his life to serving others over of an accident 40 years ago. Mary Jo Kopechne's death was tragic, but Kennedy had his day in court and took his punishment. (watch Kennedy's speech after Chappaquiddick) So forget what the "Internet trolls" say about Chappaquiddick, and give Kennedy credit for a "great life's work after a mistake."
Mary Jo Kopechne, let it be known that on the day of Ted Kennedy's death and memorial there were hundreds of thousands of mourners for his life, but there are still hundreds of thousands of people who also remembered that it was at this man's hands that your life was snuffed out at an early age. Regardless of your political affiliation and whatever radicalism may or may not have come from you if you had survived that fateful day, a human life is God's gift and should be valued as such. It appears that Ted Kennedy valued his life over yours, much like he continued to value his life over the rest of ours until his dying day. For it's Kennedy's belief that we should have health care afforded to us by us, but it's not the health care that he, Ted Kennedy, would himself sign up for. People should remember that as they wait and see if their politician will sign them up for something that is not good enough for the politician. Mary Jo may you rest in peace and I can only hope that Ted is now there with you trying like hell to make his peace with you. It's your call if you choose to forgive him and you have my support either way. However, its ultimately up to God and that is where, I believe, Ted is trembling in his boots.
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Eric Holder, Liberals and the CIA
Eric Holder, either runs the country or just does Obama's bidding while operating under the guise of pretending to be in direct conflict of what his boss, President Barrack Hussein Obama, says to do. However, to absolve himself from any responsibility and being able to claim bi-partisanship, Holder cleverly appoints a 'Special Prosecutor' to oversee the investigation into crimes (independent investigations only turned up 1 in 2004 and he was convicted) committed by the CIA interrogators. So Obama says not to investigate and lets 'look forward and not behind us' but Holder on his own (?) presses forward with the case but then turns it over to someone else? Sounds like pure partisan politics to me. Isn't there an astounding reverberation of hypocrisy here considering the Liberals, the CIA and Valerie Plame. Lest you forget:
"Once upon a time, Valerie Plame Wilson was a hero to liberals everywhere, a covert CIA operative whose cover was blown by a vindictive Bush administration out to ruin its critics. Today, liberals within government and without are betraying covert CIA operatives as if it were the very essence of virtue. Consistency, principled or foolish, has never been a hobgoblin of the liberal mind." (Bret Stephens writing in the WSJ)
"There is nothing more important than protecting the identities of CIA officers. So I need everybody to be clear: We will protect your identities and your security as you vigorously pursue your missions."
—Barack Obama at CIA headquarters, April 2009.
So now that Pelosi has called the CIA liars, despite myriad documents totally dispelling that statement, and Obama said that the identities of the interrogators and legality of what they did during EIT's would not be made public nor see prosecution, why is that Holder who works FOR OBAMA decides to overrule his boss and maybe seek criminal prosecution? Liberals will tell you that the Justice Department works completely independently of the White House. Yet, doesn't the White House nominate the AG? Liberals respond, 'well, the president also nominates supreme court justices.' True, but those are LIFETIME appointees. In politics there is a very large difference between term and lifetime appointments.
Also, why won't the White House or Justice Department now release the memo's that show the plethora of attacks that were in planning stages or imminent that were thwarted by these EIT's so that we can see for ourselves how many lives were saved by such techniques? The 'holier than thou' crowd (Pelosi included) likes to stress that laws were broken and the constitution shredded by EIT's. What laws? And the last thing that liberals need to be doing now is speaking of how Bush shredded the constitution. Look in the Obama transparent mirror before you throw stones. When highly regarded legal teams are assembled and interpret the law as it is written and Justice Dept, CIA and Congress signs off on them as what should be done 'to save American lives' then why Monday morning quarterback only when its politically expedient for you to do so? Liberals didn't seem to have a problem in 2004 or even in 2006 when these cases were brought up and discussed. In fact, these same instances that Holder has chosen to investigate (AGAIN) have already been vetted and it turned up one criminal act and that person was punished and sentenced to a jail term. Is Panetta really standing up for his operatives? Do you really think this strengthens America's security?
A hypothetical question (liberals love to do it on so many issues so lets have some fun playing their game). To save your family from certain death, an interrogator places a drill beside a kidnapper and murderer's head, pulls the trigger, and pretends that he is going to push it through the man's eyeball (but never does); meanwhile the man begins to cry like a baby about the details of where your family is and who has them (even giving up other acts he has partaken in during his past). Now, once your family is found safe and you have hugged and kissed your wife and your kids is it wise to ask that the interrogator be investigated as to whether he broke the law? Let me then ask, if he is found innocent the first time, is it wise to ask again even if it's a liberal democrat now asking?
As everyone with half a brain knows, the New York Times (losing tons of subscribers) does the liberals and ACLU/Moveon.org's of the worlds bidding by pushing the liberal agenda. It's clear why they would release the names of CIA interrogators but not captured journalists abroad, right? They claim 'privacy rights' for captured journalists but with CIA interrogators the 'public has a right to know.' Interesting that those out gathering news should be kept secret but those keeping America safe from attackers hell bent on killing us should be exposed. Identifying an interrogator, against the wishes of himself and the CIA, is worse than identifying a journalist already in captivity. But to the Times, it lent credibility to their story. Yeah, right!
As Americans awaken to the fact that 'change' never happened, partisan politics are even more out of control now than before and we are finally paying attention to what is going on in DC is it any wonder that America seems to have moved center right? The evidence is in the following: 1) the nations liberal newspapers are losing scores of subscribers while the Wall Street Journal (generally conservative with great Op-Ed pieces) was the only top 20 of nations newspapers to actually gain subscribers, 2) the evening cable prime-time news slots are dominated by Fox news (sometimes winning against all others combined) while MSNBC, CNN and CNBC are losing viewership in droves, 3) liberal talk radio ratings are so low that even Al Franken, who could win a US senator seat but couldn't carry enough audience to stay on the air with his progressive left wing rants, and 4) the scores of 'grassroots' protesters showing up at town hall meetings that still carry larger numbers than the Moveon.org and liberal funded proponents of Obamacare. Liberals have played their trump cards and fortunately for the rest of the rational and logical common sense American thinkers, it appears their hand should have been folded a long time ago. An old wiseman, Kenny Rogers, once said, "You gotta know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away, and know when to run. You never count your money when your sitting it the table. There will be time enough for counting when the dealing's done."
It seems the democrats just don't know how to play a stacked hand. They control the house, the senate and the presidency. Yet playing politics with the American people will be their downfall. The liberal madness in DC just proves one major point that both party's are guilty of but should again learn. If you are drunk on power it will turn into your kryptonite. Liberals didn't fold when they could have, they should have known to walk away and they counted their money too soon. Instead, they are left to hold their sucker bet hands and when the dealings done they won't have any money left to count and the people of America will run them out of town. Keep it up, good card players love to play at a table with suckers. It's "Easy Money!"
Saturday, August 22, 2009
"We are God's partners"
Speaking in front of a group of Rabbi's this past week while trying to rally support from religious leaders to push his 'moral objective' of government run health care Obama made the following statement: "We are God's partners in matters of life and death." This is the same Obama who told Rick Warren that when asked the point when a human embryo achieves personhood, Obama said that the question is “above my pay grade.” As an Illinois State Senator, Barack Obama argued against a law requiring a second doctor be called to provide care to a child born alive after an attempted abortion. Obama argued that this would only make it harder for a woman to choose abortions, saying it was “…really designed simply to burden the original decision of the woman and the decision to induce labor and perform an abortion.” This is also the same president who had the Crucifix covered up while giving a speech at Georgetown University, a Roman Catholic University.
So Obama says "we are God's partners in matters of life and death" but doesn't seem to make the "pay grade" to determine when life begins and once argued against a doctor administering care to a child born alive after an attempted abortion? Does this seem odd to you? There is One who knows when life begins and when life is going to end...God! Obama is not God but Newsweek columnist Evan Thomas seems to think so when he said, "I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
"I thought the use of religion in order to convince the people to follow anything political was prohibited by the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings," said Christians Reviving America's Values president Don Swarthout in a statement. "Now the President of the United States is using religion to convince people to follow his political position."
He continued: "As a Pastor I may understand the Bible a little better than the average person. Apparently, the President thinks the Bible says government should help the poor instead of the Bible calling upon Christians to give to the poor...The truth is our very salvation may depend upon helping those in need. However, there is no place in the Bible which tells us that the government is supposed to do these things for us."
As a Christian I have some words of advice for Mr. Obama. We are not God's partners. We are his children. God may have made us in His image but he did not grant us the insight into His complex creation of human existence and the universe's miraculous beginnings. He granted us the authority over earth's abundance and to administer its growth and evolutionary process until He returns. For Obama to say "we are Gods partners" to me demonstrates two very important aspects on the way he chooses to 'rule' America. First, it proves that he is a major megalomaniac; and second, he will 'use' God when it is politically expedient for him to do so. BHO had to run away from being labeled a Muslim and then tried feverishly to demonstrate to America that he was Christian. But then he ran away from Reverend Wright, his pastor of 20 years, when the seas got rough. So clearly one can see that Obama uses God for political expedience and in fact has done so more often than George Bush did in 8 years (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/09/politics/politico/main5074470.shtml). Although, to Bush's credit, he never denied God in any political forum or speech. However, Obama is using God to try and help his 'ends justify the means' argument on the government take over of health care. Obama had reinstated the 'Your Life, Your Choices' manual for our military veterans, which is a tip of the hand in how Obamacare will help you determine your termination from this existence.
Hypocritcal? Obama proclaims to the Muslim world that "America is NOT a Christian nation" but yet he uses God when trying to pass his main political agenda issue. Well, if we are not a Christian nation then I doubt God likes being used by the denier as a catalyst for his politics. Obama will wake up one day feeling naked...just like Adam and Eve did when they tempted God. It's a lonely world in that place. He should hope Waxman Markey passes so he can have some plants and leaves to use for cover.
So Obama says "we are God's partners in matters of life and death" but doesn't seem to make the "pay grade" to determine when life begins and once argued against a doctor administering care to a child born alive after an attempted abortion? Does this seem odd to you? There is One who knows when life begins and when life is going to end...God! Obama is not God but Newsweek columnist Evan Thomas seems to think so when he said, "I mean in a way Obama’s standing above the country, above – above the world, he’s sort of God."
"I thought the use of religion in order to convince the people to follow anything political was prohibited by the U.S. Supreme Court's rulings," said Christians Reviving America's Values president Don Swarthout in a statement. "Now the President of the United States is using religion to convince people to follow his political position."
He continued: "As a Pastor I may understand the Bible a little better than the average person. Apparently, the President thinks the Bible says government should help the poor instead of the Bible calling upon Christians to give to the poor...The truth is our very salvation may depend upon helping those in need. However, there is no place in the Bible which tells us that the government is supposed to do these things for us."
As a Christian I have some words of advice for Mr. Obama. We are not God's partners. We are his children. God may have made us in His image but he did not grant us the insight into His complex creation of human existence and the universe's miraculous beginnings. He granted us the authority over earth's abundance and to administer its growth and evolutionary process until He returns. For Obama to say "we are Gods partners" to me demonstrates two very important aspects on the way he chooses to 'rule' America. First, it proves that he is a major megalomaniac; and second, he will 'use' God when it is politically expedient for him to do so. BHO had to run away from being labeled a Muslim and then tried feverishly to demonstrate to America that he was Christian. But then he ran away from Reverend Wright, his pastor of 20 years, when the seas got rough. So clearly one can see that Obama uses God for political expedience and in fact has done so more often than George Bush did in 8 years (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/09/politics/politico/main5074470.shtml). Although, to Bush's credit, he never denied God in any political forum or speech. However, Obama is using God to try and help his 'ends justify the means' argument on the government take over of health care. Obama had reinstated the 'Your Life, Your Choices' manual for our military veterans, which is a tip of the hand in how Obamacare will help you determine your termination from this existence.
Hypocritcal? Obama proclaims to the Muslim world that "America is NOT a Christian nation" but yet he uses God when trying to pass his main political agenda issue. Well, if we are not a Christian nation then I doubt God likes being used by the denier as a catalyst for his politics. Obama will wake up one day feeling naked...just like Adam and Eve did when they tempted God. It's a lonely world in that place. He should hope Waxman Markey passes so he can have some plants and leaves to use for cover.
Friday, August 7, 2009
'We the people'...the Sleeping Giant awakes!
November 4, 2008 happened and to the 67 million voters of Barrack Hussein Obama all was right with the world. Yep, to them the 'Evil one' that in their minds was George W. Bush was finally finished breaking all the priceless China, stealing the sterling silver flatware, and defacing the white house busts with sharpie mustaches and triangular shaped eyebrows. Oh, thank God (or whoever you worship, if anyone at all) the evil one with horns and a tail was to be replaced with someone so trustworthy, so flawless and of such high moral clarity that the nation would be reunited again and joined in a 'have a Coke and smile' Utopia that would heal our deep wounds.
Eight months into the formation of this Utopia we have begun to realize that there were serious flaws in paradise. Paradise is still being constructed, I guess, which to most should be extremely sobering and frightening. If we deconstruct the months since Utopia was created on January 20th, 2009, what is being learned is that the foundation seems built on sand, its erect pillars thin of support, its roof lacking adequate coverage and the amenity pool substandard on appeal. If this remains then the house will certainly collapse. And if it does, the "I told you so" voices will resonate in the ears of the snookered and the drum will beat louder. The evil empire that preceded Utopia of course had its flaws, without question, but that evil dictator that ruled for 8 years didn't threaten its own citizens and talk down to the elite and proletariat alike if you disagreed with its policies. Hell, if that was the case then 67% (approval rating when the evil one left office was 33%) of the population would have been imprisoned or quarantined...for breaking what law I have no idea.
But, in this new paradise, the Utopian King and his surrounding lords of the manor have taken to attacking its citizens for just that, disagreement. They demonize those who rule with them but who are of a different belief on ideology. But this was to be paradise right? Weren't we all told that the new King would bring everyone together and put aside the childish ways that had consumed the land on which the evil empire once stood? It was to be a new day, a new kingdom ruled with equality and to be defined as a love generation. Who wouldn't want that right?
Instead, the Utopian kingdom has been more defined as 'Rule by absolutes' and 'directives' as opposed to forums and debates that then construct law for the 'greater good' and equal representation under the law. No, this kingdom now defines the 'greater good' as only those who need assistance (poor) but that in most cases refuse to be gracious to those who actually provide for the service. The poor don't take time to 'thank' the hard working class who provide them the service, no, instead they ask, 'shouldn't I receive more?' The king then repeatedly demonizes those who provide jobs/services, own land, titles and other luxuries and now wishes to choose how much land, title and luxuries they can own. Damn the fact that the same citizens who own these luxuries and pay proportionately more for the services that are provided to the proletariat also employ the same proletariat. The king that now oversees the kingdom wishes to try and provide all goods and services to the proletariat at the expense of their employers, thereby trying to lift the oppressed up and depress those who possess the means of production and have wealth creation ability. In doing so, what the whole of this kingdom's citizens are now realizing is that when those who are willing to work and take initiative to better themselves have less and that the possessions they had are now given to those who don't care to work or make the choices to better themselves that you create class warfare, mediocrity and less initiative. In other words, you cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. What you give to one must first be taken from another. Any employer with a solid business plan will succeed when it understands it cannot be all things to all people. You find your target audience and you devise how to best provide for that specific group.
But in Utopia, the king and the lords try to be all things to all people. In order to try and be all things to all people the king promotes 1) higher taxes on higher income earners to produce more revenues that he can then give as he sees fit to those less fortunate, 2) more spending at the kingdom level that will increase deficits and ultimately create a majority ownership of those debts by foreign nations with whom it trades and which are relied upon to produce the Utopia's goods, 3) hoarding the dollars that the kingdom is printing at record pace to try to stave off inflation, 4) what services are managed and controlled by the kingdom and who gets what and who actually pays for said services, 5) looting of the treasury by a supposedly independent and nonpolitical federal bank, 6) dividing power between those of his ideology against those of an opposing ideology, and 7) controlling the debate and crushing dissent of its citizens if its views differ from the kingdoms views, especially if the dissent is of how the previous 6 items listed should be managed, dissolved or altered.
It is now becoming more evident that when this Utopia is compared to previous great empires and why they fell its very easy to see the correlation. The main reasons for the fall of the Roman empire were a religion began to take away power from central government, its weakening of the military due to improper training, drastic inflation of silver (debasing its currency made up mostly of silver), poor management of the economy, a kind of feudalism (whereby a person with land, a possession, would sell it to a lord and thereby himself into slavery, since slaves didn't have to pay tax and freedom from taxes was more desirable than personal liberty), hoarding of gold bullion by its citizens, a gross imbalance in trade deficit and the looting of its treasury. Essentially, it ran out of money and was weak militarily. The great British empire collapsed as it transitioned into a commonwealth but could not afford the expense of defending and administering its large population (at the time 1/4 of the worlds population) and it lost revenue sources from the colonies that they used to control such as India, America, Iraq, etc., demanded its independence. It was also heavily in debt to the US after WWII, which capitalized on its position of banker and forced the UK to abandon the empire by threat of economic collapse otherwise. This was so that vast markets were opened to American companies and to weaken the UK in general.
Hopefully, you can see from the above examples of the fall of what many revere as the two greatest empires (prior to America's superpower reign) that our Utopia is ironically on the same path to collapse. If you do not grasp the similarities let me try to help you out. Our government mismanages everything it tries to control (Amtrak, postal service, social security/medicare, and education are just a few shining examples of efficiency and proficiency and is there a shred of logic to believe all that will change under this administration), and it is letting religious views (Muslims, atheists, agnostics, etc.) take away its power to govern by appeasing the minority religions in America at the expense of the religious majority's views. Further, its cutting funding for its military gradually over time thereby weakening it and it now has close to 60% of the population who no longer have any tax liability to the federal or state governments. Deficits are expanding at lightning fast speeds, its trade imbalances are grossly disproportional, it ultimately will debase its fiat currency through rampant inflation and it will inevitably have to raise taxes on all its citizens in order to try and pay for all the services it has promised its citizens. And I haven't even mentioned that 1) foreign nations own most of our debt thereby threatening (like America did to the UK) economic collapse if we don't play by their rules, 2) the fact that we are out of money ($1.8 trillion deficit means our expenses far outweigh our revenues) and our national debt is over $11.6 trillion (this means we are borrowing funds from the future to unfortunately consume today), and 3) the Utopia's citizens have learned a valuable lesson from the lifestyle of the last couple of decades, that it spent too much and saved too little. You now see the savings rate (see Rome's citizens hoarding gold) at near all time high's while many financial advisors are also trumpeting owning gold.
In other words, the Utopia that the majority on November 4th believed they were getting has unfortunately become a dispirited Dystopia in 8 very short (but long) months. The citizens are no longer finding the Utopia to be the triumphant Shangri-La it was assured it would inherit if this king was elected to govern. In fact, if anything this king assumed the evil empire's road map, expanded it three fold and then also is wanting to have its agenda adopted, but not later down the road. Instead it wants it now because time can't wait. Just because one ideological party won a 'mandate' that doesn't mean it can just jam through whatever it pleases based on what happened on election day. We the people are growing restless and while we have been lured to sleep with the king's elixir, the effects of it are wearing off and the sleeping giant is awakened. Hell hath no fury like a people scorned!
So we should once again recall the words our forefathers chose to begin our governing document: We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Thursday, June 25, 2009
Cap and Trade - Take action
Please click on the link and take action to stop this tax increase. Stop our government from passing legislation in a hurry when there is no need to speed things through. This is a HUGE TAX INCREASE yet Pelosi and Obama and Waxman want to cram this through without a debate!!!!
http://capwiz.com/eagleforum/issues/alert/?alertid=13628131
http://capwiz.com/eagleforum/issues/alert/?alertid=13628131
Friday, June 19, 2009
Iranian Muslims ask - Where has Obama gone?
This from a Muslim blogsite written here by American Muslims. You can read the full article at (http://muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com/ ). While Obama was releasing internet video speeches just a few short months ago to the Iranian Islamic Republic where he stressed that America is not at war with them and that he will support the people of Iran in their unyielding desire to live free from totalitarian regimes, where is his actions based on those words? It appears that the Iranians are beginning to learn what we Americans already know...Obama says one thing but does the exact opposite. He said on Tuesday that there is no difference between Mousavi and Ahmadinejad. Well, apparently the Iranian people disagree strongly with you Mr. President.
This from Jonah Goldberg at muslimsagainstsharia.blogspot.com:
"During the campaign you mocked those who belittled your rhetoric as "just words." Well, what you've offered so far is less than just words. You've put a fresh coat of whitewash on Iran's sham "democracy." On Monday, you proclaimed yourself "troubled" by the events in Iran, before hinting that you'd negotiate with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad no matter what an official investigation into his "landslide" victory found. (Would you trust Mafia internal audits, too?)"
Reportedly, you are biding your time, waiting to see what happens, as if it is a great mystery. Your campaign lived and breathed YouTube. Check it now, check it often. You and your team promised "soft power" and "smart power." How about moral power? Because by not clearly picking a side, it appears you have chosen the wrong side.
In the 1990s, liberals championed "nation building," and many conservatives chuckled at the naivete of it. Then came Iraq, and Republicans out of necessity embraced what liberals once believed out of conviction. The result? Liberals ran from their principles, found their inner Kissingers and championed a cold realism whose chill emanated from the corpse of their ideals.
Labor unions, such as the AFL-CIO, once battled tyranny abroad on the grounds that workers everywhere need democracy. Today, the president turns a blind eye to the independent labor movement in Iran, and the unions and Democrats spend their time trying to figure out how to eliminate the secret ballot in the American workplace.
So far, "hope and change" has meant spending trillions we do not have on expanded government we do not need. Meanwhile, the huddled masses of Iranians yearning to breathe free think hope and change means something more. But the new American colossus stands all but silent, her beacon dimmed, her luster tarnished.
Please, Mr. President, prove me wrong. Stop voting "present" on democracy.
------------------------------
Will Obama ever do what he says he will do? Apparently the world is beginning to learn what we unfortunately witness every day. Whether it be taxes, GM, banks, health care, Gitmo, torture, Iraq, etc., he has done the exact opposite of what he said he would do during his campaign, his acceptance speech and daily to the media. Poor Iranians are going to be left like the Iraqi's in 1993 when Bush Sr. left them high and dry. They dissidents were crushed, their faimlies slaughtered and they lived in fear of the regime for the next 16 years. If this happens to Iran you can guarantee that this event will be their 'rally against America' and the Jihad recruiting tool that Al-Qaeda has so desperately been needing. Is this what Obama thinks is good for Americans? It's complicated I know, but I have not heard one person on Fox, CNN or even MSNBC say that we shouldn't help the Iranians out at this very crucial time. To stay silent is to give credibility to Ahmadinejad, the Supreme Leader and to the mullah's. Obama looks extremely weak right now as he is being rabbit punched by North Korea, Russia and now Iran. So much for peaceful wishes of talks with your enemies changing the global landscape. Let's hope and pray that this situation does not result in calamitous consequences for the Iranian people and ultimately the people of Israel, the Middle East, Europe and America. We are at the witching hour domestically and globally. So many people pinned their 'Hope' on man with absolutely no leadership to 'Change' the way the world sees America and the way America sees America. So far we are left with a different kind of hope because the only change we have seen is that America and the world now sees how Chicago politics can change the leadership landscape very quickly.
God bless everyone and I pray for the leadership of this country that we will stand up against tyranny and fight for freedom.
This from Jonah Goldberg at muslimsagainstsharia.blogs
"During the campaign you mocked those who belittled your rhetoric as "just words." Well, what you've offered so far is less than just words. You've put a fresh coat of whitewash on Iran's sham "democracy." On Monday, you proclaimed yourself "troubled" by the events in Iran, before hinting that you'd negotiate with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad no matter what an official investigation into his "landslide" victory found. (Would you trust Mafia internal audits, too?)"
Reportedly, you are biding your time, waiting to see what happens, as if it is a great mystery. Your campaign lived and breathed YouTube. Check it now, check it often. You and your team promised "soft power" and "smart power." How about moral power? Because by not clearly picking a side, it appears you have chosen the wrong side.
In the 1990s, liberals championed "nation building," and many conservatives chuckled at the naivete of it. Then came Iraq, and Republicans out of necessity embraced what liberals once believed out of conviction. The result? Liberals ran from their principles, found their inner Kissingers and championed a cold realism whose chill emanated from the corpse of their ideals.
Labor unions, such as the AFL-CIO, once battled tyranny abroad on the grounds that workers everywhere need democracy. Today, the president turns a blind eye to the independent labor movement in Iran, and the unions and Democrats spend their time trying to figure out how to eliminate the secret ballot in the American workplace.
So far, "hope and change" has meant spending trillions we do not have on expanded government we do not need. Meanwhile, the huddled masses of Iranians yearning to breathe free think hope and change means something more. But the new American colossus stands all but silent, her beacon dimmed, her luster tarnished.
Please, Mr. President, prove me wrong. Stop voting "present" on democracy.
------------------------------
Will Obama ever do what he says he will do? Apparently the world is beginning to learn what we unfortunately witness every day. Whether it be taxes, GM, banks, health care, Gitmo, torture, Iraq, etc., he has done the exact opposite of what he said he would do during his campaign, his acceptance speech and daily to the media. Poor Iranians are going to be left like the Iraqi's in 1993 when Bush Sr. left them high and dry. They dissidents were crushed, their faimlies slaughtered and they lived in fear of the regime for the next 16 years. If this happens to Iran you can guarantee that this event will be their 'rally against America' and the Jihad recruiting tool that Al-Qaeda has so desperately been needing. Is this what Obama thinks is good for Americans? It's complicated I know, but I have not heard one person on Fox, CNN or even MSNBC say that we shouldn't help the Iranians out at this very crucial time. To stay silent is to give credibility to Ahmadinejad, the Supreme Leader and to the mullah's. Obama looks extremely weak right now as he is being rabbit punched by North Korea, Russia and now Iran. So much for peaceful wishes of talks with your enemies changing the global landscape. Let's hope and pray that this situation does not result in calamitous consequences for the Iranian people and ultimately the people of Israel, the Middle East, Europe and America. We are at the witching hour domestically and globally. So many people pinned their 'Hope' on man with absolutely no leadership to 'Change' the way the world sees America and the way America sees America. So far we are left with a different kind of hope because the only change we have seen is that America and the world now sees how Chicago politics can change the leadership landscape very quickly.
God bless everyone and I pray for the leadership of this country that we will stand up against tyranny and fight for freedom.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Costa Rica Rendition...
For those of you blessed enough to have been to Costa Rica, you know its a lovely country, with very nice people who are passionate about their futbol, their Imperial, their surf and Pura Vida. So, why on earth would NBC want to air a program titled, "I'm a celebrity...get me out of here" when is filmed in such a beautiful paradise. Having probably answered that question, you are now following with a "Why on earth are you watching such a pathetic reality TV show of old has been actors, models, comedians and Hill's stars, when you could be doing something so much more productive with your life?" This is a very fair question and I will respond in the following manner.
While my normal tv time recently has been centered around the NBA playoffs, Seinfeld reruns, Bachelorette (until my buddy was booted from the show after week 2), Fox News for fair and balanced news coverage and MSNBC for the leftist slant on all things anti-bush/conservative, I did find some time to witness "I'm a celebrity...get me out of here." Names like Lou Diamond Phillips (has he done anything since La Bamba), John Salley (last played in NBA in 2002 I think), Torrie Wilson (WWF has women wrestlers), Janice Dickenson (wasn't she just in rehab still), Sanje from American Idol fame, and some couple named Heidi and Spencer grace the program with their elegance and style (sense the sarcasm there). The point of the show is to put these people in teams and see who can't hack it. They then get eliminated.
Despite being in a controlled environment in Costa Rica one of the 'challenges' of the bottom 2 was to have to unlock yourself from 5 masterlocks with chains wrapped around you while you were in a 8 ft' high square tank. The catch was that you had to unlock the locks from a keychain that had a dozen or so keys on it and that's not all. The tank would slowly fill with water. But wait, while it filled with water things like frogs, insects and snakes were put through contraptions around the person's ankles. What I witnessed was poor Janice Dickenson struggling to get the keys to fit in the locks while a look of sheer terror remained permanently on her face the entire time she was in that tank. The gasps, screams and breathlessness that she experienced to her was torture. Despite her knowing that she would not drown, knowing that the snakes were not poisonous nor was there anything being placed in the tank that could do any long term physical harm she went nuts. To her this torture was hell.
Well, for all the stink that was in the press several weeks ago about enhanced interrogation techniques and how Bush is an evil person then you should have seen real torture to the human spirit in the episode I watched (it was torture for me to watch it let alone how Janice and Sanje must have felt). Placing someone who willingly goes into a tank to win a contest but experiences some not so comfortable things is not torture. Look, to me, putting a bra on someone's head and making them pose on all 4's with a dog collar and leash around one's neck isn't torture. Is it hurtful to your dignity, of course. But its better than watching Daniel Pearl have his head chopped off. Now that's torture...depending on your view of things, of course. I mention all of this because it brings me to the 'torture' memo's released by Obama that he still has gotten away with in the MSM for not releasing the full details like Cheney and others have requested him to do. As well as all the hoopla that the 'evil one,' George W. Bush, has had to hear from the far left lunes who claim human rights were violated in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. Waterboarding may be torture but we waterboard many in our military, according to army training manuals and CIA intelligence statements. While waterboarding may or may not be torture what I can attest to is that if I knew that there was a man in this country or anywhere in the world that was to harm my neighbors family (innocent and with children) I would waterboard and torture the hell out of them. Why? Because human life is sacred to me and according to the God that Christians follow (radical Islam seems to follow a god who suggests killing all non-believers). If the person that has information that can save a human life doesn't value the life he is about to help take then why should I care about his mental anguish or his physical pain so long as I maintain the sanctity of his life's existence? God brings life to existence and it should be left to God to terminate that existence. Asking this person questions like, "So are you going to tell me what you know?" aren't going to get you answers. I apologize to those of you who think that you break a person by asking them questions. That's how you get confessions and evidence not information about attacks. Even Obama reserved the right, just like Bush did, to use enhanced interrogation techniques when he signed into law the banning of enhanced interrogation techniques (read the fine print, again what this man says in public and what he does are two totally different things) because he knows that if pouring a bucket of water over someone's face who is lying on their back at a 33 degree angle will save American lives then he must retain that right. Imagine the outrage American's would have had against Bush if in the months after 9/11 they had not waterboarded KSM who had information on an impending attack against Los Angeles. If an attack happened with thousands of more Americans dead in Bunker Hill and people said "the mastermind was in your custody and all you did was talk to him and just ask him questions about what he knows. Of course he is not going to just freely give up the information." It's simple, the ACLU and the moveon.org's and those of our elected government placed in their power seat due to organizations like these care about everyone's rights but yours 100% of the time. They always care for the little guy until it does not personally benefit them to do so.
When will America wake up and realize that those who want to take your life do not care about their own life or else they wouldn't be willing to sacrifice themselves to pilot planes into buildings, strap suicide bombs on expectant mothers and detonate roadside bombs that will also kill their own people.
While Janice Dickenson experienced what to her was torture, I caution anyone to watch the tape of Daniel Pearl being beheaded. Now come here to UCLA and ask his parents if what they and their son experienced was torture? As you are walking away from that conversation then ask yourself, "if that was my son who was beheaded would I torture some muslim or any extremist who had information that would save someone else's child from the same fate?" If you answer no, then I hope you rest peacefully knowing that you were just as bad as the terrorist who took the life as you were an accomplice to it. You can rest easy now.
While my normal tv time recently has been centered around the NBA playoffs, Seinfeld reruns, Bachelorette (until my buddy was booted from the show after week 2), Fox News for fair and balanced news coverage and MSNBC for the leftist slant on all things anti-bush/conservative, I did find some time to witness "I'm a celebrity...get me out of here." Names like Lou Diamond Phillips (has he done anything since La Bamba), John Salley (last played in NBA in 2002 I think), Torrie Wilson (WWF has women wrestlers), Janice Dickenson (wasn't she just in rehab still), Sanje from American Idol fame, and some couple named Heidi and Spencer grace the program with their elegance and style (sense the sarcasm there). The point of the show is to put these people in teams and see who can't hack it. They then get eliminated.
Despite being in a controlled environment in Costa Rica one of the 'challenges' of the bottom 2 was to have to unlock yourself from 5 masterlocks with chains wrapped around you while you were in a 8 ft' high square tank. The catch was that you had to unlock the locks from a keychain that had a dozen or so keys on it and that's not all. The tank would slowly fill with water. But wait, while it filled with water things like frogs, insects and snakes were put through contraptions around the person's ankles. What I witnessed was poor Janice Dickenson struggling to get the keys to fit in the locks while a look of sheer terror remained permanently on her face the entire time she was in that tank. The gasps, screams and breathlessness that she experienced to her was torture. Despite her knowing that she would not drown, knowing that the snakes were not poisonous nor was there anything being placed in the tank that could do any long term physical harm she went nuts. To her this torture was hell.
Well, for all the stink that was in the press several weeks ago about enhanced interrogation techniques and how Bush is an evil person then you should have seen real torture to the human spirit in the episode I watched (it was torture for me to watch it let alone how Janice and Sanje must have felt). Placing someone who willingly goes into a tank to win a contest but experiences some not so comfortable things is not torture. Look, to me, putting a bra on someone's head and making them pose on all 4's with a dog collar and leash around one's neck isn't torture. Is it hurtful to your dignity, of course. But its better than watching Daniel Pearl have his head chopped off. Now that's torture...depending on your view of things, of course. I mention all of this because it brings me to the 'torture' memo's released by Obama that he still has gotten away with in the MSM for not releasing the full details like Cheney and others have requested him to do. As well as all the hoopla that the 'evil one,' George W. Bush, has had to hear from the far left lunes who claim human rights were violated in Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. Waterboarding may be torture but we waterboard many in our military, according to army training manuals and CIA intelligence statements. While waterboarding may or may not be torture what I can attest to is that if I knew that there was a man in this country or anywhere in the world that was to harm my neighbors family (innocent and with children) I would waterboard and torture the hell out of them. Why? Because human life is sacred to me and according to the God that Christians follow (radical Islam seems to follow a god who suggests killing all non-believers). If the person that has information that can save a human life doesn't value the life he is about to help take then why should I care about his mental anguish or his physical pain so long as I maintain the sanctity of his life's existence? God brings life to existence and it should be left to God to terminate that existence. Asking this person questions like, "So are you going to tell me what you know?" aren't going to get you answers. I apologize to those of you who think that you break a person by asking them questions. That's how you get confessions and evidence not information about attacks. Even Obama reserved the right, just like Bush did, to use enhanced interrogation techniques when he signed into law the banning of enhanced interrogation techniques (read the fine print, again what this man says in public and what he does are two totally different things) because he knows that if pouring a bucket of water over someone's face who is lying on their back at a 33 degree angle will save American lives then he must retain that right. Imagine the outrage American's would have had against Bush if in the months after 9/11 they had not waterboarded KSM who had information on an impending attack against Los Angeles. If an attack happened with thousands of more Americans dead in Bunker Hill and people said "the mastermind was in your custody and all you did was talk to him and just ask him questions about what he knows. Of course he is not going to just freely give up the information." It's simple, the ACLU and the moveon.org's and those of our elected government placed in their power seat due to organizations like these care about everyone's rights but yours 100% of the time. They always care for the little guy until it does not personally benefit them to do so.
When will America wake up and realize that those who want to take your life do not care about their own life or else they wouldn't be willing to sacrifice themselves to pilot planes into buildings, strap suicide bombs on expectant mothers and detonate roadside bombs that will also kill their own people.
While Janice Dickenson experienced what to her was torture, I caution anyone to watch the tape of Daniel Pearl being beheaded. Now come here to UCLA and ask his parents if what they and their son experienced was torture? As you are walking away from that conversation then ask yourself, "if that was my son who was beheaded would I torture some muslim or any extremist who had information that would save someone else's child from the same fate?" If you answer no, then I hope you rest peacefully knowing that you were just as bad as the terrorist who took the life as you were an accomplice to it. You can rest easy now.
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
All Hail the King has arrived!
These are images of B.H.O. being used in the Muslim world as Obama prepares to arrive there. Is it getting just a little bit scary that this man is 'worshiped' by at least the 65 million people in America who voted for him, millions in Europe, Central and South America as well as throughout the Middle East and Africa, and many believe that this man can do no wrong? As the world prepares for his speech to the muslim nation of Egypt he is being compared to the greatest Pharaoh, King Tutankhamon.
This is the same man who had the crucifix covered up at Georgetown University, a Catholic institution, when giving a speech there back in April. Granted he requested that ALL religious relics be covered so as to not appear to promote a single religion. Meanwhile, when he gave a previous speech as a Senator at Georgetown he did not make any such request. So what has happened in the past 2 years? It's not just the media who lay down for Obama but the most prestigious Catholic universities in the U.S. are now abandoning their ideals and beliefs in order to get close enough to touch Obama's cloak.
In Las Vegas, a teacher puts up a large image of Obama next to the American flag as the kids recite the Pledge of Allegiance (where is the ACLU on this). In Toledo, Ohio, in one K-12 school, kids are being made to either write letters to Obama or to write down 5 facts and opinions of Obama. Even in Toronto, Canada they have their own 'Obama Curriculum' where Obama themed music is played and children in that school have to complete 'Obama video worksheets' while learning about the presidents life (not policies or party) and his rise to presidency.
So where does the idol worship stop? Try to address this topic with one of your liberal friends who voted for and still supports Obama. To prepare you, the response will be smug with a little laughter and then it will be dismissed as no big deal. Keep in mind, these were the same people that hated the 'religious right' for their idolotary of Bush while he was president. These are also the same people who also compared Bush to Hitler. They also loved sending as much anti-Bush cartoons and stories around, that many of us who were Bush supporters actually laughed at because we can be self-depricating. Obama and many of his followers cannot laugh at themselves and they do not find the Obama cartoons (now showing up in inboxes around the world) remotely funny. To see how Obama does poke fun at himself one only has to listen to his correspondents dinner speech. His general comedic wit (and his speech writers who know him very well) is directed to others close to him, Biden, Emanuel, Axelrod to name a few. When he does make fun of himself one of his jibes was "Finally, I believe that my next hundred days will be so successful I will be able to complete them in 72 days. And on the 73rd day, I will rest." Surely this man thinks he is godlike.
So it shouldn't be ironic that his followers turn a blind eye to his arrogance and rhetoric. In the land of the blind the one eyed man is king! In this case, the one eyed man is Obama but he is in no way a king. But don't tell Barack Hussein Obama.
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Fast track passing those bills, we will figure out how to pay later!
While Obama's popularity remains relatively high (plus 60% although the gap between approval and disapproval has narrowed from +56% at its peak to now +28%) the popularity of his policy agenda is losing steam fast. So what does Obama instruct Congress & Senate to do as fast as possible. Get a health care and climate bill on his desk before the summer break. Why? Because everyone old enough to vote or who is subject to paying federal income taxes understands that the economy is teetering with the onslaught of higher interest rates or hyperinflation just over the horizon. So, don't let the fact that, as Obama recently said that "America is already out of money" get in the way of spending more money on an unproven science (more scientist dissenters of manmade global warming now than supporters) and a tried and true failure across all other socialist economies who dole out free health care. But we are America, surely we won't fail at these experiments. Impossible!
Your taxes will certainly be increased to pay for this...but wait, in the recent health care bill currently moving forward the issue of how to pay for it is amazingly NOT IN THE BILL! I guess we will just figure it out as we go along. We can trust our government to do the right thing right? I mean look at how well they managed TARP and are so efficiently handling the Stimulus monies. Whew, we are in good hands, thank God. {Oh, sorry, I need to be more careful in thanking God aloud since home bible studies are now being shut down for worshiping the Savior as our president canceled and chose not to endorse the National Day of Prayer (in existence by every other president since Truman and made permanent by Reagan) but does go out of his way to proclaim June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."}
I digress...Wow, our government officials really do think we are dumb doesn't it? Oh, I guess we are that stupid. We voted for these bums and we elected a non-leader with little to no experience of balancing anything but maybe a spinning basketball on his index finger to shepherd the greatest nation on the planet into tomorrow's destiny. How bright our future must be with the inmates running the asylum that so long as the tax rebates, tax credits and other free government handouts continue to flow most of us won't hold them accountable ?
Your taxes will certainly be increased to pay for this...but wait, in the recent health care bill currently moving forward the issue of how to pay for it is amazingly NOT IN THE BILL! I guess we will just figure it out as we go along. We can trust our government to do the right thing right? I mean look at how well they managed TARP and are so efficiently handling the Stimulus monies. Whew, we are in good hands, thank God. {Oh, sorry, I need to be more careful in thanking God aloud since home bible studies are now being shut down for worshiping the Savior as our president canceled and chose not to endorse the National Day of Prayer (in existence by every other president since Truman and made permanent by Reagan) but does go out of his way to proclaim June as "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month."}
I digress...Wow, our government officials really do think we are dumb doesn't it? Oh, I guess we are that stupid. We voted for these bums and we elected a non-leader with little to no experience of balancing anything but maybe a spinning basketball on his index finger to shepherd the greatest nation on the planet into tomorrow's destiny. How bright our future must be with the inmates running the asylum that so long as the tax rebates, tax credits and other free government handouts continue to flow most of us won't hold them accountable ?
Dismantling GM - overseen by 31 yr old Poly Sci grad!
A Romanian man, named Ion Mihai Pacepa, who was the so-called 'Car Czar' wrote a very eloquent article (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124381203054570397.html) in the Monday, June 1, edition of the WSJ about when he was commissioned by then dictator Ceausescu to run the car industry in Romania. His previous job? The head of the Romanian industrial espionage program. With no experience running a company, nor having never worked in the auto industry, his job was to build a car that was "Good enough for the idiots," Ceausescu decided. While 3 western companies (doesn't say whom) competed for the project of a 'model' car, it was French owned Renault who won the license. The first car assembled was "Too luxurious for the idiots," Ceausescu decreed and immediately had the radio, the right side mirror and backseat heating dropped (it gets darn cold in Romania in the winter). Other "unnecessary luxuries" were eliminated by bureaucrats and the worker's union that was running the factory. The final car, named Dacia, that hit the market was the 'stripped-down version of the stripped down version of the Renault 12.' Ceausescu approved that this car was "Perfect for the idiots." No Dacia car was ever sold in the U.S. and sales were abysmal in Romania. Undaunted, Ceausescu tasked Pacepa to build yet another car as he was determined to have Romanian cars on the roads in the country and abroad. The new car was named Oltcit and designed by Citroen. Ceausescu who didn't know how to drive a car let alone run an auto industry demanded that the components for the Oltcit be manufactured in the 166 plants throughout Romania. Let's just say, that it would prove an impossible task and the project lost billions of $$.
Other examples that Pacepa lays out was the Trabant. The East German govt designed this car and 'what rolled off the assembly line was a kind of horseless carriage that roared like a lawn mower and polluted the air worse than a whole city block of big Western cars.' Its production was stopped, labeled an embarrasment, and now the cars that are piled high in junkyards cannot be recycled because burning the 'plastic covered cardboard bodies would release poisonous dioxins.'
Let's not forget how unbelievably unreliable the Jaguar was when the British Govt produced the car. When Ford bought the nationalized British car maker in 1988he is quoted as saying, "Apart from some Russian factories in Gorky, Jaguars were the worst."
Ah, the successes of government run auto makers. Our fate, of course, will be dramatically different because Obama would never appoint someone to oversee the auto-industry that has no experience running an auto-manufacturer, right? Ah, think again fools!
Fast-forward to present day America, where a 31-year old who has not yet graduated from Yale Law School will now rewrite American capitalism and be tasked with dismantling General Motors (aka Government Motors). Here is his bio according to wikipedia: Brian Deese works at the National Economic Council and is special assistant to the president for economic policy. Previously, he served as a member of the Economic Policy Working Group for the Obama-Biden transition.[1] He emerged as "one of the most influential voices" in the Obama Administration relative to the auto industry, and specifically the Chrysler and GM workouts.[2] He has appeared in videos posted on change.gov by the transition team.[3] Before joining the transition team, he was deputy economic policy director for the 2008 Barack Obama presidential campaign[4] and, before that, for Gene Sperling in the 2008 Clinton campaign.[2] He graduated from Middlebury College in 2000 with a degree in Political Science[5] and is now on leave from Yale Law School.[6] Previously, he was a senior policy analyst for economic policy at the Center for American Progress.[7] Brian also worked as a research assistant at the Center for Global Development[8], hired by founder Nancy Birdsall, according to The New York Times,[2], where he co-authored the book Delivering on Debt Relief.
Keep in mind that Center for American Progress is one of the most far left organizations in the country, run by John Podesta. How does a person who graduated with a degree in Poly Sci, is on leave from Yale Law School, did not major or specialize in economics, and never run a company, let alone worked in the auto industry get the position of overseeing the collapse and 'rebuild' of the largest car manufacturer in the world? Politics maybe?
For the American taxpayer to get its money back, the smaller version of GM must achieve a market capitalization of $80 billion so that we get back our $50 billion. At GM's value peak in 2000, its market cap was $56 billion. So we must now take a smaller version of the original leading car manufacturer on the planet, and grow its market cap by more than 60% in order for you and I to get the return of our money. Does anyone really believe that this is going to happen? Can someone explain this to me?
This is mind blowing! If you can't see the politics involved here and that this project to be overseen by someone who has absolutely no idea what he is doing is doomed to fail, then I don't know how more obvious you need it to be. Funny that the 'negotiated' labor agreement with the UAW is set to be renegotiated in 2 years by an Obama administration running for re-election and will need to weigh keeping Big Labor happy versus the return of the taxpayer-shareholders money. Guess who will win that White House debate? Best of luck Detroit, your fate lies in the hands of a 31 year old graduate from Middlebury College, which the college to its credit has a very good reputation with its recognized strengths being Liberal and Environmental Studies along with Activism. Activism is synonymous with protest and dissent. Trust me, if GM fails AGAIN, there will be plenty of protest and dissent. And that is a task Deese should be very familiar with.
Other examples that Pacepa lays out was the Trabant. The East German govt designed this car and 'what rolled off the assembly line was a kind of horseless carriage that roared like a lawn mower and polluted the air worse than a whole city block of big Western cars.' Its production was stopped, labeled an embarrasment, and now the cars that are piled high in junkyards cannot be recycled because burning the 'plastic covered cardboard bodies would release poisonous dioxins.'
Let's not forget how unbelievably unreliable the Jaguar was when the British Govt produced the car. When Ford bought the nationalized British car maker in 1988he is quoted as saying, "Apart from some Russian factories in Gorky, Jaguars were the worst."
Ah, the successes of government run auto makers. Our fate, of course, will be dramatically different because Obama would never appoint someone to oversee the auto-industry that has no experience running an auto-manufacturer, right? Ah, think again fools!
Fast-forward to present day America, where a 31-year old who has not yet graduated from Yale Law School will now rewrite American capitalism and be tasked with dismantling General Motors (aka Government Motors). Here is his bio according to wikipedia: Brian Deese works at the National Economic Council and is special assistant to the president for economic policy. Previously, he served as a member of the Economic Policy Working Group for the Obama-Biden transition.[1] He emerged as "one of the most influential voices" in the Obama Administration relative to the auto industry, and specifically the Chrysler and GM workouts.[2] He has appeared in videos posted on change.gov by the transition team.[3] Before joining the transition team, he was deputy economic policy director for the 2008 Barack Obama presidential campaign[4] and, before that, for Gene Sperling in the 2008 Clinton campaign.[2] He graduated from Middlebury College in 2000 with a degree in Political Science[5] and is now on leave from Yale Law School.[6] Previously, he was a senior policy analyst for economic policy at the Center for American Progress.[7] Brian also worked as a research assistant at the Center for Global Development[8], hired by founder Nancy Birdsall, according to The New York Times,[2], where he co-authored the book Delivering on Debt Relief.
Keep in mind that Center for American Progress is one of the most far left organizations in the country, run by John Podesta. How does a person who graduated with a degree in Poly Sci, is on leave from Yale Law School, did not major or specialize in economics, and never run a company, let alone worked in the auto industry get the position of overseeing the collapse and 'rebuild' of the largest car manufacturer in the world? Politics maybe?
For the American taxpayer to get its money back, the smaller version of GM must achieve a market capitalization of $80 billion so that we get back our $50 billion. At GM's value peak in 2000, its market cap was $56 billion. So we must now take a smaller version of the original leading car manufacturer on the planet, and grow its market cap by more than 60% in order for you and I to get the return of our money. Does anyone really believe that this is going to happen? Can someone explain this to me?
This is mind blowing! If you can't see the politics involved here and that this project to be overseen by someone who has absolutely no idea what he is doing is doomed to fail, then I don't know how more obvious you need it to be. Funny that the 'negotiated' labor agreement with the UAW is set to be renegotiated in 2 years by an Obama administration running for re-election and will need to weigh keeping Big Labor happy versus the return of the taxpayer-shareholders money. Guess who will win that White House debate? Best of luck Detroit, your fate lies in the hands of a 31 year old graduate from Middlebury College, which the college to its credit has a very good reputation with its recognized strengths being Liberal and Environmental Studies along with Activism. Activism is synonymous with protest and dissent. Trust me, if GM fails AGAIN, there will be plenty of protest and dissent. And that is a task Deese should be very familiar with.
Stimulus and Highway Trust Fund
It was only 4 short months ago that the US Govt passed the $787 billion stimulus bill with the one of the primary focuses being on infrastructure building, repair and jobs. However, it was just announced today that the Highway Trust Fund is $8-$10 billion short on current in progress works according to CA Senator, Barbara Boxer who chairs the Environmental and Public Works Committee. What does she propose to make up the shortfall? You guessed it, raising the gasoline tax which will be a tax on ALL AMERICANS who use gasoline.
How can we be short $8 - $10 billion on infrastructure when the stimulus bill includes $47 billion for transportation projects, including $27 billion for highway and bridge construction and repairs? Imagine that, government officials wanting to raise taxes because they come up short on gas tax revenues (2 years in a row) to fund transportation projects yet just passed a bill to spend money on TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. $47 billion is apparently not enough!
What are we missing here as US citizens? Maybe miscalculated oversight on the job, overallocation of funds, inefficiency of completion, etc. So this is what we continue to get when the government oversees the US economy. We are all doomed...
How can we be short $8 - $10 billion on infrastructure when the stimulus bill includes $47 billion for transportation projects, including $27 billion for highway and bridge construction and repairs? Imagine that, government officials wanting to raise taxes because they come up short on gas tax revenues (2 years in a row) to fund transportation projects yet just passed a bill to spend money on TRANSPORTATION PROJECTS. $47 billion is apparently not enough!
What are we missing here as US citizens? Maybe miscalculated oversight on the job, overallocation of funds, inefficiency of completion, etc. So this is what we continue to get when the government oversees the US economy. We are all doomed...
Friday, May 29, 2009
Home Bible Study shut down by San Diego County!
Now, I know we are in a lot of trouble here in California where we, like the great ol' USA, has spent and continues to spend more than it takes in. So our government feels that its better to raise fines, taxes and everything else that involves money flowing to the capital versus cutting spending like the rest of us responsible human beings do. However, to now prey on religious worship? This has just gotten out of hand. Again, like I have said many, many times in the famous words of the prescient Ronald Reagan, "So goes California, so goes the United States of America." So far he has been spot on in every aspect. So it shouldn't surprise you if the below story ends up taking place across this once great nation.
A pastor and his wife have been ordered to pay hefty fines and purchase a 'Major Use Permit' if they continue to have bible study in their home. The war on Christianity continues, meanwhile those of Islamic faith get taxpayer funded dollars to pray in school and have foot bath's available for them at a major Michigan university. Ten Commandments have been ripped out of state or federally owned buildings. Christians cannot have dedicated prayer time in schools like Muslim's. What's next? The World Net Daily article is attached below for your review.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98895http:
Nazi Germany and Communist Russia also began forcing people out of their homes who held religious worship. Are we on that path? I sure hope not but with today's continued assault on God and Christianity one has to wonder whether or not this country will have its First Amendment rights abolished and have its Constitution re-written. Or will you demand that Christians be withheld from injustice like this and alert your government officials that this cannot continue. The Constitution's 1st Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
What San Diego has done has violated the most coveted of our freedoms. Our forefathers fled Britain and Europe for this very reason, religious persecution.
A pastor and his wife have been ordered to pay hefty fines and purchase a 'Major Use Permit' if they continue to have bible study in their home. The war on Christianity continues, meanwhile those of Islamic faith get taxpayer funded dollars to pray in school and have foot bath's available for them at a major Michigan university. Ten Commandments have been ripped out of state or federally owned buildings. Christians cannot have dedicated prayer time in schools like Muslim's. What's next? The World Net Daily article is attached below for your review.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=98895http:
Nazi Germany and Communist Russia also began forcing people out of their homes who held religious worship. Are we on that path? I sure hope not but with today's continued assault on God and Christianity one has to wonder whether or not this country will have its First Amendment rights abolished and have its Constitution re-written. Or will you demand that Christians be withheld from injustice like this and alert your government officials that this cannot continue. The Constitution's 1st Amendment states: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
What San Diego has done has violated the most coveted of our freedoms. Our forefathers fled Britain and Europe for this very reason, religious persecution.
Thursday, May 28, 2009
Obama and car Czar targets dealers who donated to GOP
A World Net Daily article is below that demonstrates that many PROFITABLE dealerships are being closed. Why you ask? Don't most companies retain profitable divisions and cut where they constantly lose money? Well, common sense would lead you to believe that. However, the way Obama runs things is drastically different than common sense. Remember, Obama has never run anything before taking over the largest economic superpower in the history of the planet. So it shouldn't surprise you that the engines (literally) that run the economy are being run into the ground. I am sure this makes all those who supported Obama very proud of their annointed leadership. Those of us who understand how business runs, and run our own businesses in fact, see things quite differently. Do you really think Obama is looking out for you and acting in your best interest? Did Bush bail out Enron, Worldcom, Kmart and other major employers and important parts of the economy back when republicans had control of DC? Nope! It wasn't until 2008 (dems in control pushing socialist agenda) that bailouts flowed to any failing company. The spicket is full throttle now so expect the travesty to continue especially with a new imperialistic leader in the white house.
OBAMANOMICS
Find out which GOP donors getting Chrysler's ax Obama receives only $450 in entire inventory of political contributions
-----------------------------...
Posted: May 27, 2009
7:57 pm Eastern
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
WND reviewed the list of Chrysler's 789 closing franchises and databases of political donors and found that of dealership owners making contributions in the recent election, less than 10 percent gifted to Democrats while 90 percent gave substantial sums to Republican candidates.
The following dealers are scheduled to lose their Chrysler franchise designation. Based on available records and databases, each of them contributed to political campaigns during the 2008 election.
Many of the dealers who donated to Republican campaigns last year also contributed additional thousands to George W. Bush's presidential 2004 campaign and to campaigns to elect GOP representatives. Those donations are not included in this list.
The listed franchise owners contributed at least $450,000 to Republican presidential candidates and the GOP in the recent election while only $7,970 was donated to Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign and $2,200 was given to Sen. John Edwards' campaign.
Of all political contributions from dealers on the list of closing facilities, President Obama received a combined total of only $450 toward his election.
For a full list of the contributors and dealerships that are being closed down please read the full article at: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99328
OBAMANOMICS
Find out which GOP donors getting Chrysler's ax Obama receives only $450 in entire inventory of political contributions
-----------------------------...
Posted: May 27, 2009
7:57 pm Eastern
By Chelsea Schilling
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
WND reviewed the list of Chrysler's 789 closing franchises and databases of political donors and found that of dealership owners making contributions in the recent election, less than 10 percent gifted to Democrats while 90 percent gave substantial sums to Republican candidates.
The following dealers are scheduled to lose their Chrysler franchise designation. Based on available records and databases, each of them contributed to political campaigns during the 2008 election.
Many of the dealers who donated to Republican campaigns last year also contributed additional thousands to George W. Bush's presidential 2004 campaign and to campaigns to elect GOP representatives. Those donations are not included in this list.
The listed franchise owners contributed at least $450,000 to Republican presidential candidates and the GOP in the recent election while only $7,970 was donated to Sen. Hillary Clinton's campaign and $2,200 was given to Sen. John Edwards' campaign.
Of all political contributions from dealers on the list of closing facilities, President Obama received a combined total of only $450 toward his election.
For a full list of the contributors and dealerships that are being closed down please read the full article at: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=99328
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)